Pointing out someone's tattoos, and how they reflect that person's beliefs, is not an ad hominem. In Hegseth's case, it reflects his Islamophobia, which many would consider problematic for a Secretary of State.
Secondly, such a tattoo is not islamophobia, it is a badge of defiance adopted among warfighters esp. in the Iraq war. Many Soldiers / Marines wore unofficial "infidel" patches / stickers such as the Major League Infidel logo adapted from Major League Baseball.
As well as the non-extremist Iraqi (and Afghani) civilians who (RIGHTFULLY) called the US government and military leadership interventionists; THOUSANDS of whom our forces needlessly murdered.
Why? Hegseth does indeed have a tattoo of that word (in Arabic) on his right bicep.
Ah, thank you for pointing that out! I actually was not aware he had a tattoo that said that.
That being said, I don't really care that he does, but I'll go back and continue reading the comment
Because how is it relevant to anything other than as an ad hominem attack?
Pointing out someone's tattoos, and how they reflect that person's beliefs, is not an ad hominem. In Hegseth's case, it reflects his Islamophobia, which many would consider problematic for a Secretary of State.
Please also tell me how alleged islamophobia is relevant to a debate between the US and China over Panama.
You'd have to ask Karla. It was her comment.
You are the one who used the word "islamophobia"
It was implied in hers.
Implied in hers, and explicit in yours.
I was making her implication explicit.
First of all, he is SecDef, not SecState.
Secondly, such a tattoo is not islamophobia, it is a badge of defiance adopted among warfighters esp. in the Iraq war. Many Soldiers / Marines wore unofficial "infidel" patches / stickers such as the Major League Infidel logo adapted from Major League Baseball.
https://www.ebay.com/itm/284937976070
Typo, I meant DefSec. A "badge of defiance"? Against who?
Against islamist extremists who frequently called Coalition forces тАЬinfidelsтАЭ and тАЬcrusadersтАЭ.
As well as the non-extremist Iraqi (and Afghani) civilians who (RIGHTFULLY) called the US government and military leadership interventionists; THOUSANDS of whom our forces needlessly murdered.
Again I ask, what relevance is that to a dispute between the US and China over Panama?
And again I say, ask Karla.
Again, you are the one using those words, do you just not want to admit you are both making and supporting ad hominem?
I'm doing neither, so there's nothing to admit.